119
119
Mar 24, 2013
03/13
by
FOXNEWSW
tv
eye 119
favorite 0
quote 0
but doma says same-sex marriage is not recognize at the federal law. she didn't get that federal tax break. that's what doma is all about, as i read what senator paul is saying, he says he would agree with the plaintiff in this case that the federal government should grant her the rights that she has under the state in which she was married. >> interesting. i am aware that in new york today there's going to be a march over doma. there are a lot of strong opinions on either side. what's the next step other than the courts? >> well, it is the courts. this is going to come up before the court this week, monday, tuesday and wednesday they're going to hear proposition 8, the whole question of whether or not same-sex marriage can be banned as it was in california, then this issue of what the federal role should be. this is tough role for conservatives because they've held db the federal doma law signed by president bill clinton, puts the government right if the middle of same-sex marriage saying it will not recognize it even if states say they do and would n
but doma says same-sex marriage is not recognize at the federal law. she didn't get that federal tax break. that's what doma is all about, as i read what senator paul is saying, he says he would agree with the plaintiff in this case that the federal government should grant her the rights that she has under the state in which she was married. >> interesting. i am aware that in new york today there's going to be a march over doma. there are a lot of strong opinions on either side. what's...
71
71
Mar 21, 2013
03/13
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 71
favorite 0
quote 0
here is what i think about doma, doma is definitely unconstitutional. but did not take my word for it. around 2005, the republicans in legislationssed oma, but they came up with a bill related to doma that stripped the courts of the right of judicial review. the courts not have judicial review, and therefore they were passing this bill to strip the courts of judicial review. why would they do that if they thought they had a constitutional bill? specifically related to doma? i feel pretty confident about what will happen there, but you never know. i think we only have time for one more question. two questions, quickly than. >> the debt limit, it seems like it will be the next big fight. the speaker said his principal will you stand eight no you open to a budget, no pay think where you do a balanced budget -- [indiscernible] >> your third part is a theoretical. yes, that is what the speaker says, and that is in keeping with the anti-government ideologues in his caucus. if you keep cutting investments in the future, that way, in order to do something that
here is what i think about doma, doma is definitely unconstitutional. but did not take my word for it. around 2005, the republicans in legislationssed oma, but they came up with a bill related to doma that stripped the courts of the right of judicial review. the courts not have judicial review, and therefore they were passing this bill to strip the courts of judicial review. why would they do that if they thought they had a constitutional bill? specifically related to doma? i feel pretty...
64
64
Mar 24, 2013
03/13
by
KQED
tv
eye 64
favorite 0
quote 0
it will hear arguments for the defense of marriage act known as doma. we discuss the issues before the u.s. supreme court. it's the final stop on a long and winding legal road. let's begin with a look at how it all started. the week of valentine's day, 2004, newly elected san francisco mayor gavin newsom, boldly, some said recklessly orders to grant marriage li
it will hear arguments for the defense of marriage act known as doma. we discuss the issues before the u.s. supreme court. it's the final stop on a long and winding legal road. let's begin with a look at how it all started. the week of valentine's day, 2004, newly elected san francisco mayor gavin newsom, boldly, some said recklessly orders to grant marriage li
156
156
Mar 21, 2013
03/13
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 156
favorite 0
quote 0
doma is definitely unconstitutional. but don't take my word for it. you have heard me say this, i'm sure, around 2005 the republicans were in the majority passed legislation specifically related to doma which had, as you know, passed some years before in the 1990's. they came up a specific bill relating to doma that stripped he right of judicial review. the courts should not have right of judicial review, and therefore they were passing this bill to strip the courts of judicial review. why would they do that if they thought they had a constitutional bill? specifically related to doma. i feel pretty confident about what will happen there. but you never know. you never know. i think i only have time for one more question. two questions then. quickly. i'll answer shorter. >> seems like it's going to be the next big fight coming up, the speaker said hins principal of reforms in cuts, wonder if you're going to stand by -- whether you would be open to another no budget, no pay, where you do a balanced budget amendment vote or something like that. that's wha
doma is definitely unconstitutional. but don't take my word for it. you have heard me say this, i'm sure, around 2005 the republicans were in the majority passed legislation specifically related to doma which had, as you know, passed some years before in the 1990's. they came up a specific bill relating to doma that stripped he right of judicial review. the courts should not have right of judicial review, and therefore they were passing this bill to strip the courts of judicial review. why...
125
125
Mar 20, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 125
favorite 0
quote 0
but what we doma maintain, and think the president is the first do so, is that israel has the rate to independently defend itself against any threat, including the iranian threat. >> i think the only thing i would add is that our intelligence cooperation on this issue, the consultation between our militaries, intelligence, is unprecedented. and there is not a lot of light, a lot of daylight, between our k our countries' assessments in terms of where iran is right now. i think what bb alluded to, which is absolutely correct, is each country has it make its own decisions when it comes to the awesome decision to engage in any kind of military action. and that israel is differently situated than the united states. and i would not expect that the prime minister would make a decision about his country's security and defer that to any other country. any more than the united states would defer our decisions about what was important for our national security. i have shared that with bb, is i said to the entire world, and said to the iranian people and iranian leaders, that i think there is tim
but what we doma maintain, and think the president is the first do so, is that israel has the rate to independently defend itself against any threat, including the iranian threat. >> i think the only thing i would add is that our intelligence cooperation on this issue, the consultation between our militaries, intelligence, is unprecedented. and there is not a lot of light, a lot of daylight, between our k our countries' assessments in terms of where iran is right now. i think what bb...
102
102
Mar 19, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 102
favorite 0
quote 0
her husband came out on march 7th for marriage equality to strike down doma. we have senator portman coming out. we have huntsman that's come out for marriage equality. has the tide turned? >> yes. there is a reason i have a big smile on my face. it's been a great time for marriage equality. we have folks across the political spectrum, the faith, the age spectrum. the super majority of americans believe in the freedom to marry. "the washington post" poll with 58% that came out yesterday is a huge bellwether of where we're going with this issue. >> last night a congressman quoted when hillary clinton and rob portman agree it is time to move on. is that really where we are? there is republican intransigence on the issue and how this is, while there has been a sea change of public opinion, our elected leaders seem slow to realize that. >> we live in a country where people are allowed to have differences of opinions on things but we also live in a country that believes in equality and fairness. i think that is what we're seeing is even when people might personally
her husband came out on march 7th for marriage equality to strike down doma. we have senator portman coming out. we have huntsman that's come out for marriage equality. has the tide turned? >> yes. there is a reason i have a big smile on my face. it's been a great time for marriage equality. we have folks across the political spectrum, the faith, the age spectrum. the super majority of americans believe in the freedom to marry. "the washington post" poll with 58% that came out...
204
204
Mar 24, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 204
favorite 0
quote 0
california's proposition 8 and the defense of marriage act or doma. the lawyer against prop 8 was on this morning's "meet the press". >> we're not asking for a new constitutional right. the constitutional right to marriage is well established. the supreme court has ruled that you can't take away the right to marry even from imprisoned felons. this is a basic civil rights issue and i don't think it's the issue that divides the court. >> joining me now, patricia and head of the supreme court practice. jonathan turley. hello to both of you. welcome. >> hi, alex. >> patricia, i'll begin with you as -- well, let's talk about in terms of prop 8, what we heard just there, correct, i mean, the right to mary already, has it been well-established? >> well, the right to marry is but what the court hasn't grappled with is what is the definition of marriage and that, as we know, is the issue hotly contested in this case and what they will be confronting and in particular what is the role of the courts in that, the role of the states, the role of the federal consti
california's proposition 8 and the defense of marriage act or doma. the lawyer against prop 8 was on this morning's "meet the press". >> we're not asking for a new constitutional right. the constitutional right to marriage is well established. the supreme court has ruled that you can't take away the right to marry even from imprisoned felons. this is a basic civil rights issue and i don't think it's the issue that divides the court. >> joining me now, patricia and head of...
101
101
Mar 22, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 101
favorite 0
quote 0
thing for the republican party at this point would be for the supreme court to strike down prop 8 and doma so this becomes settled law of the land and they do not have to deal with the schism inside their party and all the old guys who are culturally or religiously or for whatever reason resistant to marriage equality will no longer be holding office and will die off, i think is what josh says, and the republican party can move past this. >> well, it would take a brave republican in the meantime to move against the party on this with only 34% support in the republican party. and rand paul is not that brave republican. it's always fun to watch him torn between libertarianism and republicanism as he is on this thing, the libertarian view, of course, is that government should have nothing to do with religion in any way. they don't understand why the state would -- be issuing marriage licenses. but, you know, there he is. stuck defending the republican position. and -- but ari, going forward, if the supreme court doesn't help out the republican party this way, how long would it take for there
thing for the republican party at this point would be for the supreme court to strike down prop 8 and doma so this becomes settled law of the land and they do not have to deal with the schism inside their party and all the old guys who are culturally or religiously or for whatever reason resistant to marriage equality will no longer be holding office and will die off, i think is what josh says, and the republican party can move past this. >> well, it would take a brave republican in the...
103
103
Mar 25, 2013
03/13
by
CURRENT
tv
eye 103
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> i think the case against doma is extraordinary. i cannot imagine the court not declaring it unconstitutional. in fact, i am so hopeful i think we might even get a 6-3 vote out of this. >> bill: wow. >> because in one since you could make the conservative case that the federal court was messing in state's business. from a conservativeview point, you could possibly vote against it. i think the prop 8 case is very much up in the air. it's interesting to me that the court took it on because it could have just let the lower court decision stand which would have declared it unconstitutional for california. why did they check it out? i don't think it's to overturn the lower court's decision and i don't think that we will see them proclaiming marriage equality nationwide. >> yeah. >> what i do think is is that they will overturn -- excuse me. they will affirm prop 8s unconstitutionality for california but they will be doing it as a way of signalling to the country that marriage equality for all is on its way. >> right. >> that will be a gr
. >> i think the case against doma is extraordinary. i cannot imagine the court not declaring it unconstitutional. in fact, i am so hopeful i think we might even get a 6-3 vote out of this. >> bill: wow. >> because in one since you could make the conservative case that the federal court was messing in state's business. from a conservativeview point, you could possibly vote against it. i think the prop 8 case is very much up in the air. it's interesting to me that the court...
139
139
Mar 23, 2013
03/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 139
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> if the high court decides on doma, what does that mean for opponents for same-sex marriage? is that a settled issue, but is it like obama care and we'll still be talking about it years from now? >> we'll still be talking about it. let's let the states decide one at a time and that's probably the best way. public opinion is definitely shifting. maybe ten years from now, they all will be there. >> if the states decide, then we have patch work of laws where you have folks who can get married in california, but if they move to nebraska, are they recognized there? whatever your politics, there needs to be a settled universal law. >> for a while, gay rights advocates have argued that this shouldn't be settled in the courts, because he wanted a victory of public opinion. he wanted states one by one to have their people come over to the right side of the issue in their view. but i think that even andrew sullivan have come to the point where they say the majority of americans support same-sex marriage and those who oppose it are becoming less and less politically relevant. i think th
. >> if the high court decides on doma, what does that mean for opponents for same-sex marriage? is that a settled issue, but is it like obama care and we'll still be talking about it years from now? >> we'll still be talking about it. let's let the states decide one at a time and that's probably the best way. public opinion is definitely shifting. maybe ten years from now, they all will be there. >> if the states decide, then we have patch work of laws where you have folks...